Health Service Commissioner : first report for session 1981-82 : selected investigations completed April-September 1981 / Health Service Commissioner.

  • Great Britain. Health Service Commissioner.
Date:
[1981]
Catalogue details

Licence: Open Government Licence

Credit: Health Service Commissioner : first report for session 1981-82 : selected investigations completed April-September 1981 / Health Service Commissioner. Source: Wellcome Collection.

    14/218 (page 12)
    27. The complainant’s paragraph 33 appears in the same letter as his para- graph 28 and requested that the consultant clarify his position as regards the ‘allegations’ which he had ‘refuted’ (see paragraph 21 above). Again the imme- diate response was that this had been answered and the complainant raised the matter again in his paragraphs 36, 42, 50, 56 and 70. The AHA maintained the stance that the consultant had asked for complaints to be put to him direct; but the complainant pointed out to the DA that he was seeking clarification of information contained in letters signed by the DA and he could therefore see no reason why he should seek clarification elsewhere. Findings 28. No doubt the DA’s handling of these voluminous complaints was less than perfect. He could have dealt with the complainant’s paragraph 28 sooner than he did and he might well have commented on the communication difficul- ties referred to in the complainant’s paragraph 4. But in the context of a com- plaint which was presented in a total of 75 paragraphs running through many letters, these faults seem to me quite trivial. I do not uphold this complaint. (ii) The failure of the AHA to answer the complainant’s questions about the hospital’s policy in relation to parents’ rights 29. In the complainant’s initial letter of complaint to the AHA, he alluded to his and his wife’s attempts to obtain information about their son’s treatment and asked whether it was the hospital’s policy to respect the parents’ right and moral responsibility to seek information and clarification about the medical treatment of their children. He asked also what measures existed to safeguard the position of parents on this point. In a subsequent letter the complainant asked what measures and/or disciplinary action had been taken as a result of the specific complaints he made about his attempts to seek information about his son’s treatment. 30. The AHA told the complainant that it was hospital policy to respect the rights of parents but that the first priority was the treatment of the patient; on occasion, the giving of information to parents had to take second place. They advised the complainant of a leaflet which encourages parents to seek informa- tion and said that measures to safeguard parents’ rights were unnecessary because all staff were aware of their duty to give appropriate information and advice to parents. The AHA later told the complainant that disciplinary action was not considered appropriate but that junior medical staff in the A and E department had been counselled and nursing and medical secretarial staff reminded about the need to ensure that patients and relatives are given the various information leaflets which are available. 31. As regards the specific complaints about seeking information, the AHA replies pointed out that their (the parents’) presence, when the nursing staff wanted to clean their son’s wound, made the nursing task difficult; that the consultant was irritated by repeated interruptions from both the complainant and his wife and that the DA had concluded that both the consultant and they were at fault. Findings 32. I believe that the AHA made a reasonable attempt to answer both the